beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;
2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 15, 2004, the Defendant prepared and rendered to the Plaintiff a letter stating that “I waives C forest land (hereinafter “instant land”) by no later than November 15, 2004 (hereinafter “each letter of this case”).
B. At the time of the preparation of each of the instant notes, the instant land was owned by E, and the provisional registration was completed in the name of D as of September 8, 2004.
【Ground for Recognition - Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings】
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. On October 15, 2004, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased KRW 50 million to the Defendant on November 15, 2004 with the due date set on November 15, 2004, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the said money to the Plaintiff.
In addition, the content that waives the instant land in each of the instant notes means that ownership should be transferred to the Plaintiff.
However, the defendant did not comply with this.
B. The Defendant’s assertion was that the Plaintiff introduced land to E representative director F and received KRW 50 million from the commission. F sold the instant land or brought the instant land itself.
At the time, provisional registration was made in the name of the plaintiff and the defendant corporation in the same business, and F made a cancellation of provisional registration by paying fees.
C. According to the records in Gap evidence No. 1, it is acknowledged that the defendant, under any pretext, paid KRW 50 million to the plaintiff until November 15, 2004. However, considering the whole purport of the pleadings, the defendant's obligations under each of the documents in each of the documents in this case are sufficient to waive the land of this case. The provisional registration in each of the documents in this case was de facto cancelled after the preparation of each of the documents in this case, the defendant stated that he paid fees to the plaintiff on November 15, 2004, and the plaintiff was about 10 years from November 15, 2004.